Indiana Palladium, Volume 1, Number 21, Lawrenceburg, Dearborn County, 27 May 1825 — Page 6

original debtor, was granted at the i pcrirtl instance of Mr." Thomas. However, it is worthy of remark', on the subject of relief being granted to the purchasers of public lands, there was but little diversity of opinion hi Cougrest, Gen t Jemen from the Ea?t, tee North, trie South, and the West, concurred m the necessity and justice of the measure the only difference of opinion indicated, seemed to be the best mode of efictuatii.g so desirable an object. As to the part you have taken cn the subject of the extinguishment of the Indian tiiie to lands within our state, on treaties foreign and domestic, and, in your secret sessions, &c. &c. I have never called it in question 'tis not my design to detract from your merit. Believe me, when I say, mv bosom glows with pleasure indescribable! a laudable pride animates my nature! when I contemplate the honour and glory of our nation! the perfect symmetry and harmony of our institutions, in ail their parts and when I contrast the present condition of cur infant state, with what it was when 1 first made it rny home. No one can be more alive to her interests, and the honour of her sons, than myself. Now, sir, we will take under consideration, the appointment of Messrs. Vance and Hoiman, to the Land Offices at Fort Wayne; I assure you there is nothing unpleasant to me in that name, also the cause of personal feeling, you impute to me. You admit your instrumentality iu the appointment of those gentlemen did Brutus charge you with any thing less ? You also acknowledge that this same Mr. Hoiman was serviceable to you at your last election Brutus said the same. But you attempt to justify yourself for procuring Hoiman his appointment: What is your justification? you present us with his recommendation; attached to which, is a long list of honourahle names. But I would ask how are recommendations of this character fre

quently obtained? When I first met with Mr. Hoiman, Corydon, I should have felt warranted in signing a recommendation in his favour mvself; from the hisrh

ml O terms of commendation, in which 1 had previously and frequently heard you name him. But, sir, I will now ask you were there not other gentlemen well recommended for the same office? (I have no allusion to myself.) Yes, sir, there were. Did you present eacji one to the President fairly, and according to his claims and merit? No, sir, you did not: As evidence of this fact, what was your language in the fall of 1 822, before you left home for the city of Washington? It was this 1 will use my utmost exertions to procure the appointment for Hoiman. What was your language when you returned? I have obtained the appointment for Hidman, and I glory in it; and were it to do again, 1 would do the same if it damndmc iu the estimation of the state. Deny this, "and I will bring down upon you the evidence" of living witnesses, who will testify to the fact. I again ask you, was your course disinterested? -Did you recommend ah accordimr to iheir claims and merit? These are questions, our constituents perhaps would like to hear answered. The appointment of Mr. Vance, I believe no one has yet complained of. The re are few perhaps who entertain a higher opinion of that gentleman than 1 do: "But the inducement, forhis appointment, with our worthy member, isof a piece with his political course. It is unnecessary to say more; time will make manifest the hidden motive." These remarks of Brutus, you request particularly to have explained; although you say they are "unmeaning expressions" if so, they are not capable of being explained. Yet, "I think that" you, "with an utter worthless talent, by accident, the" expressions were "understood" to mean "a sleeping" "partner,' and the acquisition of honourable and influential friends. You say, "that the members" from Indiana, "were net intriguing to get you the app nvtriicr.t of Receiver or Register of the Land Office at Fort Wayne, though I recommended you fairly according to your claims and merit." Sir, I never required it at your hands. I never stipulated with you or any other member, as a reward for my voic for present or future favors; neither have I ever sacrificed the rights ot any one, to promote my individual interest Though I admit, I was an applicant for an appointment in the Brookville Land Oilico. I had good ground to rely on you'r friendship I did expect to succeed I wasdisappointed. Did it produce in me a dereliction from duty ? Was I inlluenced by private feelings in the discharge of any public trust ? No sir. When you were a candidate for the U. S. Senate, the ensuing winter, 1 voted for you, which you have acknowledged. When my vote against you, would, in all pibahility, have prostrated you. As to the Fort Wayne appointments, it is well known, and particularly to vou, that J was not disappointed. I told you distinctly, verbally, arid in writing, that I did not expect to succeed; and that I knew you would, without regard to my qualifications or claims, or those of any other applicant, advance the interest of him who would promote or best subserve your individual interest; and were it left to mv own

choice, I would not be an applicant: but, at the earnest request of a mutual and particular friend, who vras materially intcres:od in mv prosperity, I suffered my name to be used. Tuese are facts, sir, which stare you in the face, and cannot bo controverted. Perhaps you ma' i .quire my mo'ive in voii-g for vou, if I believed you to be that utter worthless" individual,

you would have me ray you arc. Sir, my motives were disinterested I hvx no dcubt but it was the wish of my constituents, that you should be elected; I knew you possessed native gera;c. that w. vi:.ceptih!e, !;v application, of improvement; and that by nature you were endowed with a nobleness and magnanimity of soul, a striking characteristic of your family, which, if cherished and improved, would do honour to yourself, your connexions, and the state: but O alas ! how changed! how is the fine gold tarnished! Now, sir, I .submit to an intelligent public to decide between us, who is wreathing under disappointment, and has been governed by personal feelings, ad inlluenced by selfish and interested motives, before and since "th day of" our "losses:" my loss, the puny offsce at Fort Wayne yours, all "those delightful I ancics, of splendid domes and honours bright; of foieign missions and executive uence." Extatic visions! celestial hope! whvhave you left us! 'tis e'er 'tis vanished! all al. are gone! O! sympathize with me I feel for you ! I did not intend to notice any part of your letter, that was designed by you as an answer to Messrs. Dunn ;.nd MTikc; but as you have associated me wi'h i'.f rrv ( nid by your rule of logic,) made their language my own, Y will meet you cn your own ground, and apply this new system of logic to yjur case. For illustration, I will inquire who this U m. II. Crawford b, with whom vou are charged with having disgraceful connexion. Mr. Crawford, in my estimation, is an intelligent and eminent statesman. Why did the particular friends "and supporters of Messrs. Adams. Clay, and Jackson, object to Mr. Crawford for our President? I will assign a reason. Mr. Crawford is believed to be opposed to the late decisions in Congress, on the constitutional question, as to the extent of the powers of the general government, to aid, facilitate, and posecute interna! improvements. What evidence have we of his hostility to internal improvement? I submit the following, to wit: Mr. Crawford was nominated for the Presidency in caucus, by say GO members of Congress; about liftv of whom were of the House of Representatives. When the Bill "to procure the necessary estimates, plans, and surveys, upon the subject of Roads and Canals" was on its third reading, forty-three or four out of fifty voted against said bill. Again, what do the editors of the Richmond Inquirer say 12th February, 1825? "There is yet a Spartan band to rally around the rights of the states and the people; who, though defeated, will persist; though they fall, will rise again." Thus far the sentiment is good but hark! "In Georgia, in S. Carolina, in New-York, in other quarters, lights are continually breaking out against the present heresy of the doctrine of the general welware" (internal improvement.) kThe old dominion is firm, fearlcsc, and unshaken." Again, what was said in the legislative hall at Richmond, the rallying point of Mr. Crawford's party, and tho enemies of internal improvement, when the election of Mr. Tazewell, to the U. S. vSenatc, was under discussion? In substance it was this: We have had formidable parties to contend with; but now we have one more formidable, in the friends of the tariff and internal improvements with Mr. Clay at their head. All this, by your. mode of reasoning, is no more nor less, than the unequivocal expression of the feelings and views of Mr. Crawford and his coadjutors; and you are one of them. I will carry this mode of reasoning a little further: I will premise the existence of a parly in cur government, whose principles are in unison, and whose primary object is individual aggrandizement. At the head of this party, has stood Mr. Crawford and the hon. member from Frankli;:, i ouo of ihui party. To establish these positions, I will give you another quotation from the Richmond Inquirer, and others from your own declarations: "To Mr. Crawford' sczm friends, permit me to address a few words by w ay of admonition. The eyes of the country are now fixed upon them. Circumstances have raised them to the post of honour and the post of danger. Can we doubt as to the course which they will pursue? "Union and firmness" must be the watchword. Though their ship sinks, let them imitate the noble crew of the sinking French ship, who raised their hands and shouted "Vive La RepubJique." Suppose they were desirous of electing Jackson in preference to Adams, they could not effect it. To elect Adams, when pushed on by such a strange coalition, would be to cover them with the reproaches

oi the people. lo drop into the rear ot either of the other candidates, at the very moment of their success, without its, would be derogatory to the lofty pretentions with which ut have hitherto borne ourselves. Wc should lose our own self-respect; and we should not gain the respect of any body else. Wc should be regarded, as we deserved to be, as the refuse of the par

ty to whom we had attached ourselves. Heretofore, zve have borne ourselves rloft; with our beavers up; with honour sparkling in our eye We have displayed a species of highmindedness; a sort of moral and intellectual strength, which has made itself fe.'t wherever we have moved. If re now separate and dissolve away, each solitary member of the puriy would become an object of scorn." I ask, does not this establish, conclusively, the existence of a party? Were more evidence requisite, I

couklgivc it but it is unnecessary 'tis well understood. To establish the object of this party, I will refer to your own declarations, made in the Senate of the U. S. in a speech on the subject of the Congressional Caucus. You stated, "The object of the Gntcus was to produce union." Again, you observed, "in New York, if you had been rightly informed, some years ago, upon a certain occasion, in electing a Sen ator from that state to the United States, the election was delayed, and an union formed between the Federalists and Ciintonians, in order to suit certain individuals, and to answer individual purposes ." Here you emphatically enquire, "What was this but a caucus?" Very true, my dear sir what else could you make of it but a caucus? one directly in point ra parallel case with the late caucus, and referred to hy you as evidence of the motive which gave rise to ?7, "to effect a union" for the express purpose of suiting certain individuals , "& to answer individual purposes." In conclusion, I w ill give your apology to your party, for your occasional dereliction from them. In vour letter of the 9th of March, to Messrs. Gales and Seaton, after stating, had you been present, you wouidhv.e sanctioned'the nomination of Mr. Clay to the office of Secretary of State vou close in these words, "In giving mv vctc, I should have been governed by two considerations: First, his distinguished talents; and secondly, that I would not oppose an administration, at the very commencement, for party purposes." Your first reason was a good one; but your second was in substance this I am true to my party; but, if I oppose Mr. Clay what will my constituents say? and the friends, of internal improvement. I will therefore vote for Mr. Clay, and excuse myself to my party for so doing, by saying, it is too soon to oppose the administration, to effect "party purposes" -But, least you may say I give an unfair construction to your second reason for supporting Mr Clay's nomination, I will give the views of one of yourown party on the same subject, from the Richmond Enquirer. '"It will afford justifiable ground for the public to suppose and believe, that the 14 votes n"ainst Mr. Clay's nomination do not embrace all the members who censure his late course in regard to the Presidential election on the contrary, we may rather suppose from this and other circumstances, that there was scarcely one who approved it; but preferred as a lesser evil, to pass it over, rather than make so signally ominous an "opposition to the administration at the very threshhold" as Mr. Noble expresses it." Now sir, I hope you are convinced, from your own mode of reasoning, that y ou have done me injustice by imputing disappointment and personal feelings to me; and by charging upon my head, the letter of Messrs. Dunn and MTuke. Because thev answer vou with severity, you attempt to make their language my own; that you may h rap apoit vy shoulders ibting the least able to bear up under its weight) all the scurriliity and personal invective which may suit your purpose best. No Mr. Noble, "I will not treat you as you have me." Although I have established everv position which I have assumed; and have shown conclusively the existence of a party, hostile to internal improvement; and that their object was individual aggran dizement; and have identified you as one of that party ; I do not hold you responsible for their acts; neither do I require you to account particularly to me for yours: it is the public with whom you have to do; but I pray you, do not attempt to evade any charge alleged against you, by impugning my motive: the hidden things of the heart no man knoweth. Judge me by my words and actions: it is the rule by which I judge you. The character of public men is public property; and we have a right to inspect it, to praise or blame as it merits; and all that duty requires of you, is to acquit yourself of improper charges: Truths cannot be controverted. If, in the course of my remarks, I have said any thing harsh or unseemly; I hope you will forgive me. I have studiously avoided every thing of that character, except what I borrowed from your letter to me; and, not relishing it very well myself, I have returned it to its proper owner.

ENOCH D. JOHN. Lawrexceburgh, April G, 1325. Sir: Yours dated 4th April, 1825, was received yesterday. By it we are informed uiai Mr. Noble charges you with being concerned in the production of our letter to him, lately published in the Palladium, and of having aided in procuiing Us publication in the Brookville paper. With pleasure we comply with your request, and state unequivocally that you had no concern whatever in the writing of that letter, neither did you advise or suggest any thing upon the subject. Equally unfounded is the assertion that you joined with G. H. Dunn, in procuring the publication at Brookville: The letter to the editors of the Inquirer containing that request was penned on the morning -ofter his arrival at Brookville, and if his memory serves him, before he even seen you. Yours respectfully, ' DUNN & M'PIKE. E. D. JOHN, Esq.

!5 t